For 2024, I’m with John Fetterman. Don’t label me.

If you had asked me this time last year if I supported Israel’s right to exist, I would have first asked why you were asking, before answering, “Of course.”

This year, no one need ask. After the Oct. 7 attacks, I feel it is my moral obligation — as many on the political right do — to not only defend the right of Israel to exist but to show solidarity for my Jewish brothers and sisters in any way possible.

From private conversations to visits to synagogues, personal donations to Israeli causes, and symbolic gestures, many on the right have been united in finding ways to support Jews.

But perhaps my greatest inspiration came from the left. It was U.S. Sen. John Fetterman draped in an Israeli flag at a Washington, D.C., rally in support of the Jewish state that inspired me to replace the Star of Bethlehem over the outdoor plastic nativity I inherited from my spouse’s grandmother with a neon Star of David.

For this, I’ve been accused, among other things, of being a Zionist. I support Israel’s right to exist, without reservation or shame, just like Fetterman.

While I received near unanimous support for my views on the right, Fetterman is given no such safe harbor on the left. Progressives, including some former anonymous campaign staffers, are now calling his support for Israel and refusal to demand a cease-fire a “gutting betrayal,” labeling him #GenocideJohn.

In the greatest of sins, the hard left has accused Fetterman of not being a “real” progressive.

Fetterman’s response was to remind the left that Israel has every right to go after the people trying to kill them. He then thumbed his nose at the left-wing purists by telling them he’s not one of them anyway.

That came as a bit of a surprise on both sides of the aisle, as most saw Fetterman as the embodiment of a modern progressive.

But Fetterman’s support for Israel isn’t the only place he’s failed the political test for the left. He has offered sensible advice on handling the catastrophic situation at the border by suggesting that Democrats talk to Republicans about implementing solutions.

“I hope Democrats can understand that it isn’t xenophobic to be concerned about the border,” Fetterman chided his own party.

Fetterman also supports fracking. During his 2022 campaign for U.S. Senate, the then-lieutenant governor told NBC News, “I supported the energy security we should have in the United States.” He clarified his prior stances against fracking were only to get better regulations for environmental protection.

Some call this political expediency at its worst and accuse Fetterman of saying only what he needs to get elected. Yes, that is what politicians do. But the American government is not a church.

Whether Fetterman really believes in fracking and border security is not as important as the fact that he understands his fidelity must be to what’s best for the people he represents and his country.

Fetterman’s support of Israel is a defining moral moment for America and our leaders. His move away from the label “progressive” in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attacks reminds me of what many on the right went through after the U.S. Capitol riots on Jan. 6, 2021. Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell excoriated President Donald Trump, the Republican National Committee, and the rioters after Jan. 6, and was attacked by his right flank. Then-Vice President Mike Pence not only condemned the riots but certified the elections despite them. That action likely cost him his career in politics and killed his presidential chances, yet he has never expressed regret.

Fetterman, McConnell, and Pence have shown political courage in breaking ranks with the growing authoritarianism of the political left and right in America. Too often, political labels are used to hamstring politicians and citizens into saying and doing that which is deemed politically pure, even in the face of immoral actions.

Being trapped under a political label negates the very heart of civil society: the ability to think, debate, and change one’s mind.

Political labels are reductive — forcing people into binary stands on issues that have nothing in common. Why is it that people who want big government solutions with higher taxes and spending must also be against the Second Amendment? How can so many people who support LGBTQ rights also support calls for the genocide of Jews?

Like Fetterman, I have also felt hamstrung by political labels. It’s expedient to say I’m a conservative, but I lean more libertarian, which in fact makes me a classical liberal — a label meaningless to most people. Like so many on the right and a growing number on the left, my political philosophy has no easy categorization. If forced to define it, my politics can be surmised like this:

Two married lesbians and their adopted, homeschooled children have the right to defend their pot farm with guns while the mosque next door preaches against firearms, homosexuality, and intoxicants.

To infuse this vision with the spirit of America that so many of us were raised to love, I’d add the final clause: And when it snows, they shovel each others’ sidewalks.